 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / March 2004Calories & Metabolism
Hi all, I've been doing pretty good, not too many cravings (I'd say any cravings I have had are due to emotional triggers rather than physical) but at the same time, I'm wondering if I restrict my calories too much to soon, am I going to screw my metabolism? For example at my weight and activity level I burn an estimated 3,400 calories/day, and I'm eating approximately 1700 calories/day. I shoot for at least 2200/day but, as is typical with this WOE, I just havent been too hungry lately, (it's the good time of the month right now) in another week and half my appetite will increase again. While I'd love to lose as much weight as quickly as possible, I don't want to slow down my metabolism too much and if I keep it to 2lbs per week then I should be eating approx. 2500 calories /day. My concern is, should I be trying to go for higher calories? When I finally hit maintenance I don't want to have slowed down to a point where my metabolism can only handle 1200 cals a day, know what I mean? Any comments/suggestions? Thanks, Monica  Signature______________________________________ Started 01/20/04 362/334.6/250 ______________________________________ "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." - Unknown? > an estimated 3,400 calories/day, and I'm eating approximately 1700 Oh, at 3400, what exactly is your activity? This is a lot... Mirek >>> an estimated 3,400 calories/day, and I'm eating approximately 1700 >> >> Oh, at 3400, what exactly is your activity? This is a lot... >> >> Mirek Well I carry about 334lbs all day and my estimate is based on light to seated activity. Not exercising a whole lot right now, but I am moving more than I used to. Signature______________________________________ Started 01/20/04 362/334.6/250 ______________________________________ "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." - Unknown? > >>> an estimated 3,400 calories/day, and I'm eating approximately 1700 > >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > seated activity. Not exercising a whole lot right now, but I am moving more > than I used to. I believe that you have misscomputed this... try this... http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html I think your calorie requirements are about 2300 cal/day now. 1700 for losing is very reasonable. Do not be afraid about starvation mode until you are below 1000 cal/day. Mirek :: "TavliGal" <TavliGalNoSpAm@SPAMLESSshaw.ca> p??e v diskusn?m :: p??sp?vku news:zmX1c.678018$JQ1.621419@pd7tw1no... [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] :: Do not be afraid about starvation mode until you are below 1000 :: cal/day. I agree. Also, what exactly is your current rate of loss and how much have you been eating? Without that information what you've posting is meaningless. >> "TavliGal" <TavliGalNoSpAm@SPAMLESSshaw.ca> p??e v diskusn?m >> p??sp?vku news:zmX1c.678018$JQ1.621419@pd7tw1no... [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> >> Mirek Hi there, I did the calculations on that site and it pretty much corresponds to my fitday calcs too, I have the PC version. I calculated it at: 7 hrs rest ( I rarely sleep more than that) 13 hrs at very light, and 4 hours at light = 2208 BMR (is that resting metabolic rate?) 1150 Activity Calories 3,358 Total Calories I'm 5'2.5" On a more conservative calulation of only very light activity at 17hrs and 7hrs sleep, the BMR stays the same and the activity calories go down to 782 which = 2990 Total Calories. Therefore I burn at least 2990 - 3358 calories/day. Since Jan 20th, as of this morning, I've lost 28.6lbs The overall rate of loss per week has been 4.45lbs/week. The overall rate of loss per week over the last 14 days = 3.23lbs/week. I'm averaging approx 28% protein, 62% fat, and 11% carbs with an overall average of 2024 calories a day. There are many days where I'm at a max of 1700 cals which is why I was wondering if that would hurt in the long run. Monica Signature______________________________________ Started 01/20/04 362/333.4/250 ______________________________________ "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." - Unknown? I don't think this calculator can be very accurate...it said I should be eating over 2300 calories, and I have never eaten that many unless it was a special occasion. I try to stay less than 1500. Julia 250/175/150 Atkins July 2001 > > >>> an estimated 3,400 calories/day, and I'm eating approximately 1700 > > >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Mirek Julia burbled across the ether: > I don't think this calculator can be very accurate...it said I should > be eating over 2300 calories, and I have never eaten that many unless > it was a special occasion. I try to stay less than 1500. I assume the 2300 number is the "total calories" the calculator comes up with by combining basal and activity calories. If you are just looking at the total and not adjusting downward for weight loss, remember that "2300 total" is your *maintenence level* for your *current weight*. To lose a pound a week at your current weight, you need to eat 500 calories less (2300-500=1800)-- since you say you are trying to stay under 1500 (how much under?), your loss should be between 1.5 and 2 pounds a week (depending on how often your calorie level comes to 1300 a day, and still assuming the 2300 is your basal+activity with no other modifiers). Does this sound about right to you? If you've already done the math and the 2300 is your bmr+activity-calorie restriction for weight loss then you are beyond the parameters of the Harris-Benedict calculator --athletes and the *very* overweight do not get accurate estimates with this formula (the most common calculator on the web). If you know your lean body mass, then you can use the Katch-McArdle formula to get the most accurate BMR estimate available. This formula takes into account lean body mass and is therefore more accurate than the Harris- Benedict formula which is based on total body weight. By the way, the Harris-Benedict formula uses different formulas for men and women because men generally have a higher LBM and this is factored into the men's formula. Since the Katch-McArdle formula accounts for LBM, this single formula applies equally to both men and women. BMR (men/women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean body mass in kg) OR BMR (men/women) = 370 + (9.8 X lean body mass in lbs) a quick way to find your lean body mass http://www.intmed.mcw.edu/clincalc/body.html. But you still have to remember that the answer to this calculation will also be a maintenence level of calories for your current weight. I don't know of a calculator that does the subtraction for weight loss for you (although it would be THE killer app for dieters. Any programmers want to tackle creating a lean body mass calc combined with the Katch-McArdle AND auto subtraction of 500 and 1000 cals for the two major weight groups -- those with 50 or less pounds to lose, and those with 100 or more pounds to lose that displays one "calories to shoot for" answer depending on whether the user indicates which group he/she is in?) Signaturerevek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June 2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please "I think you bent the needle on my irony meter. I'm not really sure, though, because the case is busy arcing and the entire unit appears to be melting and burning a hole in the lab bench." -- John S. Novak III > But you still have to remember that the answer to this calculation will > also be a maintenence level of calories for your current weight. I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > for" answer depending on whether the user indicates which group he/she > is in?) I could probably do it - my question would be, do you want something that's PC-resident and can keep track of things, or just a web-based calc that doesn't track? My programming skills are lying fallow these days and getting rustier all the time, but I could probably come up with something workable for PC. For a web-based one I probably wouldn't have time to tackle it - I haven't done that much scripting anyway, and so I'd have to delve back into the books for awhile before I could even start, <g>. Stargazer burbled across the ether: >> But you still have to remember that the answer to this calculation >> will also be a maintenence level of calories for your current [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > scripting anyway, and so I'd have to delve back into the books for > awhile before I could even start, <g>. Hey PC-resident with tracking sounds fab! If it takes off like hotcakes would you be wanting to market it or would it be a gift to asdlc? Hmm perhaps some built-in non killable without a lot of work announcement of the creator/donation kind of thing? (Thinking of all the thieves who swiped the asdlc cookbook) Signaturerevek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June 2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please "A plateau is just a landing strip for the Whoosh Fairy" --Peggy S. > Stargazer burbled across the ether: > >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > the creator/donation kind of thing? (Thinking of all the thieves who > swiped the asdlc cookbook) Nah, it'd be a gift. Selling it means I'd be obligated to support and update it constantly, <g>. I'd need someone else to host it for downloading though, because I don't have the space (the CAB file for the installer could end up being pretty large, since I only have the packager that comes with Visual Studio which isn't near as efficient as the Wise or InstallShield ones). I don't think it would take a whole lot of coding, really. I can build something that makes use of an Access database (you don't have to have Access on your computer to use it, the installer will load all that's needed), that will keep all the data you enter. If you can email me with all the parameters you'd like it to track, and formulas it needs to use (stargazer67 at bellsouth dot net), I'll see what I can gin up. Stargazer burbled across the ether: > Nah, it'd be a gift. Selling it means I'd be obligated to support and > update it constantly, <g>. I'd need someone else to host it for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > you'd like it to track, and formulas it needs to use (stargazer67 at > bellsouth dot net), I'll see what I can gin up. Oh gee, wow, if you pull this off I'd have to kiss your feet. Lessee, well my dream calculator would 1) have to have a simple input for lean body mass. Formula(s) from the lean mass calc site: a) Body Surface Area = 0.20247 x Height(m)0.725 x Weight(kg)0.425 b) Lean Body Weight (men) = (1.10 x Weight(kg)) - 128 ( Weight2/(100 x Height(m))2) c) Lean Body Weight (women) = (1.07 x Weight(kg)) - 148 ( Weight2/(100 x Height(m))2) d) Ideal Body Weight (men) = 50 + 2.3 ( Height(in) - 60) e) Ideal Body Weight (women) = 45.5 + 2.3 ( Height(in) - 60) f) Body Mass Index = Weight(kg) / Height(m)2 2) also the Katch-McArdle BMR formula: BMR (men/women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean body mass in kg) AND?OR BMR (men/women) = 370 + (9.8 X lean body mass in lbs) with descriptions of what constitutes the various levels of activity in a side bar or something, 3) plus the weightloss modifier for at least two groups, and possibly three (50 or less, 100 or less, and over 100-- those who are severely overweight can cut a lot more than a person with only 50 pounds to lose before they undercut their bmr) but that info shouldn't be in a sidebar so the user can't pick a higher number so they can 'optimize weight loss' and end up doing themselves harm. 4) Maybe a tie in to a simple weight chart for a nice visual. Input your weekly weigh-in, and it will auto re-calculate (assuming your variables stay the same, but with the option to change any of the variables) as you 'go down'. This way folks won't get confused about calorie calculators and think the total calorie expenditure for their current weight should be what they should eat to lose weight. 5) Does lean body mass stay the same throughout the weight loss phase, or is there some small amount of lean mass lost on a lowcarb diet? I'm sure there would be more lost on a lowfat diet if so, so maybe there should be an indcator for whether you are doing lowcarb, lowfat, or lowcalorie. I don't know what the calculation would be for the various diets. Perhaps ask Lyle McDonald? Basically I invision inputing one or two numbers once you've got your variables set and each time you input a new weight it recalcs lean mass, and calorie goals for weight loss. Oh! and perhaps a goal input that when reached will switch you to maintenence calories instead of weight loss calories. Maybe an option to input (by hand of course) fityday-type (from any tracker proggie it doesn't really matter) numbers (protien, fat, carbs, fiber) so you have a running daily/weekly/monthly/yearly? total of hard numbers and percentages. Say make it a part of the weight chart visual? Anybody else have suggestions? Signaturerevek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June 2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please Don't get *too* absurdly maudlin. It's bad for the skin.--Andrew Plotkin > Stargazer burbled across the ether: > > Nah, it'd be a gift. Selling it means I'd be obligated to support and [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > > Anybody else have suggestions? Okay, that gives me a good starting point - I can easily incorporate suggestions as it goes along as well (we can start a new thread if we need to for that when I get the basics done as well, since everyone might not be drilling this far down in this one). First thing is to get the nuts and bolts working, then the extras after the basics are there. Charts and graphs shouldn't be too much of a problem, nor is importing (or exporting) data from a spreadsheet difficult (so if you're tracking percentages in a spreadsheet, you could auto-import that by simply telling the program where to find your spreadsheet and the values in it - or enter by hand if you aren't). I'll get started today (it's raining here, so the yardwork I was planning to do is out for now anyway), and will probably have many more questions for you as I go along, <g>. Stargazer burbled across the ether: >> Stargazer burbled across the ether: >>> Nah, it'd be a gift. Selling it means I'd be obligated to support [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > planning to do is out for now anyway), and will probably have many > more questions for you as I go along, <g>. Oh wow this is so cool! Thank you, thank you thank you! Where do you want my first born sent to? :) Signaturerevek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June 2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please "What then are the three best things in life?" "To crush your opponents' arguments, to drive the trolls before you, and to hear the 'Me Too!'s of lurkers from AOL!" > Oh gee, wow, if you pull this off I'd have to kiss your feet. Please, no feet kissing ;-) > Lessee, well my dream calculator would http://www.delorie.com/health/calories.html > 1) have to have a simple input for lean body mass. > Formula(s) from the lean mass calc site: > > a) Body Surface Area = 0.20247 x Height(m)0.725 x Weight(kg)0.425 What is this formula for? And what are the constants after the height/weight? Are they exponents? > f) Body Mass Index = Weight(kg) / Height(m)2 Would it be better to let the user type in their current %bf if they know it? > BMR (men/women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean body mass in kg) This doesn't take into effect the number of calories/lb that adipose tissue uses. The numbers look really funny without that. > with descriptions of what constitutes the various levels of activity in > a side bar or something, I just put in 10% to 30% increases. If you can document what to ask for and how to adjust calories from that, I'll change it. > 3) plus the weightloss modifier for at least two groups, > and possibly three (50 or less, 100 or less, and over 100-- those who > are severely overweight can cut a lot more than a person with only 50 > pounds to lose before they undercut their bmr) but that info shouldn't > be in a sidebar so the user can't pick a higher number so they can > 'optimize weight loss' and end up doing themselves harm. I figured 1 lb/week loss for every 50 lbs/week overweight, plus 0.1 lb/week extra so that it doesn't take forever to hit goal. I put a chart on the right side that says "weight this much... eat this much... to lose this much...". Easily changed if you think other numbers make more sense. > 5) Does lean body mass stay the same throughout the > weight loss phase, or is there some small amount of lean mass lost on a > lowcarb diet? I'm sure there would be more lost on a lowfat diet if so, > so maybe there should be an indcator for whether you are doing lowcarb, > lowfat, or lowcalorie. I don't know what the calculation would be for > the various diets. Perhaps ask Lyle McDonald? If you can figure out the math, I'll add it. There's a link at the bottom of the cgi output that lets you see the equations. DJ Delorie burbled across the ether: >> Oh gee, wow, if you pull this off I'd have to kiss your feet. > > Please, no feet kissing ;-) LOL. >> Lessee, well my dream calculator would > > http://www.delorie.com/health/calories.html Well darn I guess I'll have to drop by your site and pay more attention this time, eh? <surf over t'your place>....... Gee, you need to promote this a little more agressively! The only things missing from my dream calc are the protien/fat/carb ratio tracker, a way to keep track of one's personal record over time andthe visual bar/line chart showing same. Does your bmr calc use the Harris- Benedict formula or the Katch-McArdle? >> 1) have to have a simple input for lean body mass. >> Formula(s) from the lean mass calc site: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > What is this formula for? And what are the constants after the > height/weight? Are they exponents? I have no idea- body surface area, I suppose. why that is important to the creator of that page is beyond me. Math is not my forte. These formulas were displayed on the link that I gave in my original post for calculating lean body mass. >> f) Body Mass Index = Weight(kg) / Height(m)2 > > Would it be better to let the user type in their current %bf if they > know it? I assume most people don't know it. >> BMR (men/women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean body mass in kg) > > This doesn't take into effect the number of calories/lb that adipose > tissue uses. The numbers look really funny without that. Do you know what that would be? I assume you take that into account in your bmr calculator, yes? >> with descriptions of what constitutes the various levels of activity >> in a side bar or something, > > I just put in 10% to 30% increases. If you can document what to ask > for and how to adjust calories from that, I'll change it. Some people have no clue what their activity level really amounts to. For instance, I over estimated my activity level until I got a few examples of activities and where they were located on the scale. I'm talking about the usual calculator like http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html activity scales. >> 3) plus the weightloss modifier for at least two >> groups, and possibly three (50 or less, 100 or less, and over 100-- [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > much... to lose this much...". Easily changed if you think other > numbers make more sense. I don't know. :) I was merely thinking along the lines of 500 cal deficit for those with 50 pounds or less to lose, 1000 for the Centuries and 1500 for the largest folks. >> 5) Does lean body mass stay the same throughout the >> weight loss phase, or is there some small amount of lean mass lost [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > If you can figure out the math, I'll add it. There's a link at the > bottom of the cgi output that lets you see the equations. As I said, I'm no math geek. I figured Lyle would know. Or if he didn't he could find out who would farily easily. Bookmarking your page. Note to Stargazer: I'd still like to see a pc-resident version if you want to work on it. I'm a very happy camper today. Signaturerevek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June 2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please "jack-knifing from argument to argument, jigging direction randomly and erratically like a shoal of Argument Fish being followed by a Truth Shark", in the words of Mil Millington. > Note to Stargazer: I'd still like to see a pc-resident version if you > want to work on it. You bet - I need the practice, because I'm not getting anything on the 'create' side at work at all anymore (only maintaining existing stuff, which doesn't take a lot of time or thought). And I'm starting to forget about things that only come around with initial program creation, <g>. So it's a good skill-refresher exercise for me. I'll continue on using what you've given me so far, unless you decide differently. I will ask and figure out the other currently murky things (such as the question of LBM and how it changes) as I get to them, or maybe someone will answer them before I get there and save me the question, <g>. As of right now, I have the essentials of the database built and am starting on the program itself. Stargazer burbled across the ether: >> Note to Stargazer: I'd still like to see a pc-resident version if >> you want to work on it. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > me the question, <g>. As of right now, I have the essentials of the > database built and am starting on the program itself. hot diggity damn! thanks! (have grandson in lap-- very curious about keyboard) Signaturerevek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June 2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please Let's just say that if complete and utter chaos was lightning, he'd be the sort to stand on a hilltop in a thunderstorm wearing wet copper armour and shouting 'All gods are bastards'. - Rincewind Expaining Twoflower, Terry Pratchett, The Color Of Magic > Well darn I guess I'll have to drop by your site and pay more attention > this time, eh? <surf over t'your place>....... Gee, you need to promote > this a little more agressively! Too agressively becomes spam, though. I mention it when people ask about stuff I happen to have. > The only things missing from my dream calc are the protien/fat/carb > ratio tracker, You mean the math from Jenny's site? > a way to keep track of one's personal record over time Yeah, adding personal accounts in the few minutes I had just wasn't practical ;-) > Does your bmr calc use the Harris- Benedict formula or the > Katch-McArdle? http://www.delorie.com/health/calories.cgi?source $bmr = 370 + 21.6 * $lbm; I added another 4.4*$extra_fat for now; this is kgs above ideal weight. > I have no idea- body surface area, I suppose. why that is important to > the creator of that page is beyond me. Math is not my forte. These > formulas were displayed on the link that I gave in my original post for > calculating lean body mass. Ok, I'll ignore it. > > Would it be better to let the user type in their current %bf if they > > know it? > > I assume most people don't know it. Right... *if* they know it, should we use that instead of the math? > > This doesn't take into effect the number of calories/lb that adipose > > tissue uses. The numbers look really funny without that. > > Do you know what that would be? I assume you take that into account in > your bmr calculator, yes? I don't know what it would be, and I don't currently take it into account. That's why the results look strange - a 250 lb guy (goal=160) would be eating only 1000 cals/day without that factor. I found one web site that claims 2 kcals/lb/day. That would add only 200 kcals to the above example, though, and makes the RMR for myself wrong :-P I've added that factor in. > > I just put in 10% to 30% increases. If you can document what to ask > > for and how to adjust calories from that, I'll change it. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > talking about the usual calculator like > http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html activity scales. Hmmm... maybe I'll add a slot for "if you know your current maintenance calories, enter it here...". Or see what the other sites do. I did find a site that tabulated the % ratios for various activity levels, so I've adjusted my numbers for that for now. > I don't know. :) I was merely thinking along the lines of 500 cal > deficit for those with 50 pounds or less to lose, 1000 for the Centuries > and 1500 for the largest folks. That worked out to 1lb/week per 50 lbs to lose. There's probably limits on both extremes; 10% below maintenance for skinny folks is Lyle's recommendation. > As I said, I'm no math geek. I figured Lyle would know. Or if he > didn't he could find out who would farily easily. I'm a math geek. That doesn't mean I know *which* math to use, though. If you can find trustworthy info, I can fit it into the form. > Note to Stargazer: I'd still like to see a pc-resident version if you > want to work on it. Yeah, mine is more of a one-shot "figure it out for me" page. Tracking is best done on one's local machine. I was just rereading the Pool book "Fat: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic" which is a wonderful overview of laboratory research on diet and metabolism up through 1998. Pool describes in great detail some very good laboratory research that suggests that people's metabolisms do vary hugely and that some fat people do burn a lot less calories than people who are 80 lbs less than they do. Even more important, added to these innate differences, once you lose 10% of your starting weight, very good research shows that the metabolism slows down about 15%. So the calculators have to be taken with a huge grain of salt. I logged my food input and exercise for slightly more than a year, measuring portions carefully because none of the figures worked for me. I and came out with a very consistent calorie level for losing, maintenance and another one for weight gain. The number I get from real experience is about 600 calories less than what the formulas (and a Medical School dietician) tell me I should be able to eat. I am currently maintaining at exactly 10 times my body weight in calories. That is undoubtedly because I am way below the weight my body thinks is normal for me (which is up around 165). The researchers at Rockefeller University start all their weight loss subjects with experimental levels of controlled nutrition and then slowly bring them down until they reach the level where they lose weight. For many of the very fat people who have failed other dieting regimens, that level does turn out to be <gasp> 800 calories a day. Maintenance for the same people turns out to be slightly LESS than ten times body weight before they start to lose. So forget the formulas unless you are Mr. or Ms. Average. -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm > DJ Delorie burbled across the ether: > >> Oh gee, wow, if you pull this off I'd have to kiss your feet. [quoted text clipped - 99 lines] > erratically like a shoal of Argument Fish being followed by a Truth > Shark", in the words of Mil Millington. I think we all agree that YMMV when it comes to calories. However, many people need at least a starting point. Plus, once you know what the various numbers are going to be for you, there's still some math involved if you want to fine tune everything. > So the calculators have to be taken with a huge grain of salt. Yeah, but some people need lots of salt ;-) I have Wise and web space at your disposal. You build it and I'll build a wise installation exe (stored in a zip file). Pj >> Stargazer burbled across the ether: >> >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >all the parameters you'd like it to track, and formulas it needs to use >(stargazer67 at bellsouth dot net), I'll see what I can gin up. > I have Wise and web space at your disposal. You build it and I'll > build a wise installation exe (stored in a zip file). > > Pj Cool. I may or may not try to make use of the Wise (not sure if sending you all the .dll's, executable, and db would end up being any more efficient than using the built-in packager), but I will need the host space. I'm still progressing on it, though it's slow going through the week (because by the time I get home from work, I don't tend to have a lot of enthusiasm for more coding, <g>). So far I have the user data input screen built, and multiple conversion functions (such as metric to standard, so the user can use either measurement system and the program will remember which one they prefer) built in. I've also built in capability for more than one user to enter/track data on the same computer, and that's about it up to now. I do have a question for you about Wise, though - one of the components installed with the program is the MDAC version used when building the program (I used 2.7, which an XP user would probably already have, but a 9x user probably wouldn't unless they have Office 2k or higher and also install their updates regularly). My heartburn with the V.Studio installer is that it doesn't look to see what the user's current MDAC version is before installing it - it just installs it every time, whether it was needed or not (not that this hurts anything, it just wastes time and space because the MDAC installation is the slowest part of the install as well as being one of the larger parts of the .cab file). Does Wise have the capability of determining whether a component really needs to be installed before it installs it, and if so can it store it in a separate dependency file and only grab it as needed? >> I have Wise and web space at your disposal. You build it and I'll >> build a wise installation exe (stored in a zip file). [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >installs it, and if so can it store it in a separate dependency file and >only grab it as needed? It has scripts that permit quite a latitude of queries, but I wouldn't suggest making it that complicated since most users have gigabyes available. I usually use it to install Delphi applications which have a quite small exe footprint with no dll's required, but can query if needed. When you get it ready, stick all of it in a zip file and notify me here and I'll give you a spot to send the file. You can also include (in the zip file) an index.htm file with download instructions for your customers. Meanwhile I'll clean out a spot for your page with upload instructions. Pj I don't really care what it is, just as long as my clothes fit and I don't gain. I have about 25 more pounds to lose (I've lost about 75 so far) and if I lose a pound or two a month I'm happy. Julia 250/175/150 Atkins July 2001 > Julia burbled across the ether: > > I don't think this calculator can be very accurate...it said I should [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > for" answer depending on whether the user indicates which group he/she > is in?) > Well I carry about 334lbs all day and my estimate is based on light to > seated activity. Not exercising a whole lot right now, but I am moving more > than I used to. If you're using Fitday, it's known for grossly overestimating calories burned unless you pick "sedentary" and add exercises specifically. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." This is just my opinion, but if I were you (how tall are you, BTW?) I'd try to get that excess weight off as quickly as possible, without fasting, of course. Certainly for someone your size, 10 lbs/month isn't unreasonable, unless you have some sort of metabolic resistance to losing using this method. When you get a little closer to normal weight, then worry about it. I doubt, personally, whether you will slow down your metabolism, but can't say that I know anything from personal experience. In Feb., the first month I signed up for Challengers, I didn't even make 3 lbs. The other months I was doing LC, I basically shot for 10 lbs a month and usually made it. Now that I'm closer to goal, I'm readjusting my thinking so that I am not too disappointed. Also, I wasn't exercising. Now I've started and I'm seeing the weight loss starting again. Since you have so much to lose, I'd really not worry about "slowing it down" yet. Unless of course, you do have thyroid problems or something, in which case we should strive to help you speed it up. In that case, I'd do some research of revving up your metabolism. If I were you, unless it quit working, I'd follow the Atkins plan...eat 2-3 meals a day, following his suggestions...see how you lose...take some vitamins. Fat is supposed to speed up your metabolism (?) I think. If you do start slowing down towards the end, then revamp. But you've got a ways until that point, IMO. Nothing is meant to be cruel or uncaring. Hardly. I've had some real encouragers around me keeping me going on this diet. But, I think you are worrying a bit "prematurely." Becky - curious 199/145.5/135 www.family.solidrockpl.org The last thing you have to worry about is eating too little. Are you looking for an excuse to start stuffing yourself again? SignatureMost of us probably aren't in danger of eating too little. :) Becky P. > Hi all, > I've been doing pretty good, not too many cravings (I'd say any cravings I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Any comments/suggestions? > Thanks, Monica >> The last thing you have to worry about is eating too little. Are you >> looking for an excuse to start stuffing yourself again? >> >> -- I figured you'd chime in at some point. No JC I'm not looking for an excuse to stuff myself again, I'm just looking to see if I'm on the right track for continued weight loss and for long term success. Thanks for your concern, Monica ______________________________________ Started 01/20/04 362/333.4/250 ______________________________________ "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." - Unknown? If you are really concerned, then eat less and exercise more. SignatureMost of us probably aren't in danger of eating too little. :) Becky P. > >> The last thing you have to worry about is eating too little. Are you > >> looking for an excuse to start stuffing yourself again? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.601 / Virus Database: 382 - Release Date: 2/29/04 > I'm wondering if I restrict my calories too much to soon, am I going > to screw my metabolism? The more overweight you are, the harder it is to do this, but it is possible. At 334, the "usual" recommendation is 10-12x (3340 to 4008 kcals/day), but for those with a lot to lose, it's more like 8-10x (2672-3340) or less. You should be losing weight at about 2 lbs/week once you settle in to lc, although with lots to lose, more is possible for a while. The closer you get to goal, the slower you'll lose. > For example at my weight and activity level I burn an estimated > 3,400 calories/day, and I'm eating approximately 1700 calories/day. How much weight per week do you lose? Each lb/week corresponds to a 500 kcal/day deficit; if you're losing 3 lbs/week that means you're 1500 kcals below your "maintenance" level. Figure this out now! Later, you can judge if your metabolism has slowed down by re-computing this number and figuring out your new maintenance level. > I shoot for at least 2200/day but, as is typical with this WOE, I > just havent been too hungry lately, Add more carbs. IMHO this is where Atkins' CCLL comes in - it's the right level of carbs to keep your appetite at just the right number of calories. If not, eat more calorie-laden foods, like fattier meats, nuts, heavy cream, and salad dressing. > While I'd love to lose as much weight as quickly as possible, I > don't want to slow down my metabolism too much and if I keep it to > 2lbs per week then I should be eating approx. 2500 calories /day. > My concern is, should I be trying to go for higher calories? Once you know your "uncrashed" maintenance rate, you can usually fix any crashed by eating at maintenance for 2 weeks. After that, reduce your calories by a few hundred cals/day for a week or two and see what happens, then reduce again, etc, to bring you back to 1-2 lbs/week loss. :: "TavliGal" <TavliGalNoSpAm@SPAMLESSshaw.ca> writes: ::: I'm wondering if I restrict my calories too much to soon, am I going [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] :: kcals/day), but for those with a lot to lose, it's more like 8-10x :: (2672-3340) or less. I would modify this to be like, "At 334, the usual recommendation is more like 7 to 10x, but is typically 10-12x" The more overweight one is, the more of a deficit they can run without problems. I think the metabolism crash thingie gets too much press. :) Carry on. You should be losing weight at about 2 lbs/week :: once you settle in to lc, although with lots to lose, more is :: possible for a while. The closer you get to goal, the slower you'll [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] :: what happens, then reduce again, etc, to bring you back to 1-2 :: lbs/week loss. > I would modify this to be like, "At 334, the usual recommendation is more > like 7 to 10x, but is typically 10-12x" > > The more overweight one is, the more of a deficit they can run without > problems. I agree. Just poor wording on my part, I guess. > I think the metabolism crash thingie gets too much press. :) You'd think so, but I've got two women living in this house with crashed metabolisms, and I can't really use the "near goal" excuse for either. > You'd think so, but I've got two women living in this house with > crashed metabolisms, and I can't really use the "near goal" excuse for > either. are you sure that they are not secretly cheating with their diet? i > are you sure that they are not secretly cheating with their diet? People keep asking me that, and no, I don't think so. I occasionally check their intakes carefully, and one of them rarely eats ANYTHING much less a healthy diet. Yesterday she got a whopping 500 calories or so, and she was so happy she remembered to eat a lot that day! The other one has to force herself to eat enough, she usually stops at 800 cals or so otherwise. She's going to try to reset her metabolism and start LC all over again, from the beginning, with higher calories. She *did* lose weight when she first started LC (30 lbs over three months), but that was a year ago. :: Ignoramus15020 <ignoramus15020@NOSPAM.15020.invalid> writes: ::: are you sure that they are not secretly cheating with their diet? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] :: higher calories. She *did* lose weight when she first started LC (30 :: lbs over three months), but that was a year ago. Have you ever heard of people sleepwalking? I wonder if people who sleepwalk eat also...while roaming around.... > Have you ever heard of people sleepwalking? I wonder if people who > sleepwalk eat also...while roaming around.... Given how late I stay up working, I doubt that would happen without me knowing about it. Hi, > Have you ever heard of people sleepwalking? I wonder if people who > sleepwalk eat also...while roaming around.... Some people sleep eat: http://www.anred.com/nsred.html http://www.sleepfoundation.org/sleepeating.cfm Take care, Carmen :: Hi, :: On 5-Mar-2004, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] :: http://www.anred.com/nsred.html :: http://www.sleepfoundation.org/sleepeating.cfm Wow...and I was half kidding when I wrote that! Hi, > :: Hi, > :: On 5-Mar-2004, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Wow...and I was half kidding when I wrote that! What an obnoxious malady. You could watch what you ate religiously and exercise like a demon every day - and then sleep-eat all the progress away while you weren't even conscious. It's probably quite rare, but I can't help feeling for people who have it. All the willpower on earth wouldn't do you any good. You'd have to have someone keep custody of a key to the kitchen in order to block access to food while you were asleep. "There are stranger things..." Take care, Carmen Hi DJ >> "TavliGal" <TavliGalNoSpAm@SPAMLESSshaw.ca> writes: >>> I'm wondering if I restrict my calories too much to soon, am I going [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> Later, you can judge if your metabolism has slowed down by >> re-computing this number and figuring out your new maintenance level. Over the last 14 days, I'm losing an average of 3.23 lbs per week which equals 1,615. Do I now add 1,615 to my average calories eaten? which would then work out to average overall calories burned? Thanks, and sorry I suck at math. :) Monica >>> I shoot for at least 2200/day but, as is typical with this WOE, I >>> just havent been too hungry lately, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> what happens, then reduce again, etc, to bring you back to 1-2 >> lbs/week loss. Signature______________________________________ Started 01/20/04 362/333.4/250 ______________________________________ "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." - Unknown? > Over the last 14 days, I'm losing an average of 3.23 lbs per week > which equals 1,615. Do I now add 1,615 to my average calories > eaten? which would then work out to average overall calories > burned? Yup. If you were eating 2,000 cals/day, you're burning 3615 cals/day. Note that this math doesn't work right for the first two weeks (induction) because all the water weight you lose then messes up the numbers. The 500 cals/lb trick makes figuring this out a lot easier. Also note that you can figure out your multiplier now, too. For 3615 cals/day and 334 lbs, that's 10.8 kcals/lb. This number goes *up* as you lose weight (more lean flesh, less fatty flesh). You can see why people with more to lose need to eat at 7-10x rather than 10-12x. At 12x, you'd be gaining weight. If you track all this on a week by week basis, you'll see the burn rate slowly drop. If it drops at the same rate as your weight, you're golden. If it suddenly seems to drop more than you expect, you're not eating enough. Then, eat at whatever your most recent "maintenance" burn rate was (3615 for today, for example) for two weeks to reset your metabolism, then try again. As you see your burn rate drop, of course, you can lower calories also, to keep your loss rate where you want it. > Thanks, and sorry I suck at math. Everyone has to suck at something, or we'd all be impossible to live with ;-) >> "TavliGal" <TavliGalNoSpAm@SPAMLESSshaw.ca> writes: >> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >> Everyone has to suck at something, or we'd all be impossible to live >> with ;-) Thanks alot DJ, that was very helpful. Signature______________________________________ Started 01/20/04 362/333.4/250 ______________________________________ "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." - Unknown? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.